Adoption of Amendment to Prohibited Transaction Exemption (PTE) 99-29 Involving Bankers Trust Company, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (DBTCA), and Deutsche Bank, AG, 68092-68093 [05-21962]
Download as PDF
68092
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 9, 2005 / Notices
servicing agencies. It is used as an aid
for grant recipients to report the status
of their expenditures.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond/reply: The estimated number of
respondents is 15, 304, and the
estimated time for an average
respondent to reply is 30 minutes.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: There are approximately
30,608 annual burden hours associated
with this collection.
If additional information is required
contact: Brenda E. Dyer, Department
Clearance Officer, United States
Department of Justice, Justice
Management Division, Policy and
Planning Staff, Patrick Henry Building ,
Suite 1600, 601 D Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20530.
Dated: November 3, 2005.
Brenda E. Dyer,
Department Clearance Officer, Department of
Justice.
[FR Doc. 05–22274 Filed 11–8–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security
Administration
[Exemption Application No. D–11246]
Adoption of Amendment to Prohibited
Transaction Exemption (PTE) 99–29
Involving Bankers Trust Company,
Deutsche Bank Trust Company
Americas (DBTCA), and Deutsche
Bank, AG
SUMMARY: This document contains an
amendment to PTE 99–29 (64 FR 40623,
July 27, 1999), an exemption granted to
Bankers Trust Company. PTE 99–29
permits DBTCA (formerly known as
Banker’s Trust Company) to continue to
function as a qualified professional asset
manager (QPAM) under PTE 84–14 (49
FR 9494, March 13, 1994). The
amendment affects participants and
beneficiaries and fiduciaries of
employee benefit plans to which
DBTCA served as custodian.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The amendment is
effective as of January 31, 2003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Allison Padams Lavigne, Office of
Exemption Determinations, Employee
Benefits Security Administration, US
Department of Labor, Washington, DC
20210 at (202) 693–8540. This is not a
toll-free number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
February 3, 2005, the Department
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:18 Nov 08, 2005
Jkt 208001
published a notice of proposed
exemption that would amend PTE 99–
29. The amendment was requested in an
application filed on behalf of DBTCA.
DBTCA is a New York banking,
fiduciary, record keeping custodial,
brokerage and investment services to
corporations, institutions, governments,
employee benefit plans, governmental
retirement plans, and private investors
worldwide, Deutsche Bank, AG
indirectly wholly owns DBTCA.
The proposed amendment invited
interested persons to submit comments
to the Department on or before March
21, 2005. On February 17, 2005, the
applicant notified the Department that
the names and addresses of certain
individuals who may be entitled to
receive notice of the proposed
amendment were contained in records
that were destroyed by the events that
occurred on September 11, 2001. As a
result, the applicant did not notify
interested persons within the three-day
period specified in the proposed
amendment. The applicant requested
that the comment period be extended to
ensure that interested persons would
have a sufficient amount of time in
which to provide their comments to the
Department. In addition, the applicant
stated that it had the names and
addresses of custody clients of DBTCA
as of December 31, 2002. The applicant
believed that this list of clients would
reasonably include all parties that
would have an interest in the proposed
amendment. The Department concurred
with the applicant. Accordingly, on
March 29, 2005, the applicant sent
notice to all custody clients of DBTCA
as of December 31, 2002. This notice
informed interested persons of their
right to comment on the proposed
amendment, and informed these
persons that comments were due to the
Department on or before May 27, 2005.
Written Comments
The Department received one written
comment. No requests for a public
hearing were received. The comment
was submitted by the applicant who
wished to clarify that check ledgers,
cancelled checks and class action
records that are described in the notice
of proposed amendment continue to be
the property of the applicant, but such
materials can only be effectively
searched using State Street’s record
keeping systems. In this regard, State
Street currently serves as inquiry
response and information agent for the
applicant, and maintains information on
its systems. The applicant relies upon
State Street to answer inquiries related
to these records. Under the terms of the
applicant’s arrangement with State
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Street, State Street may resign from its
inquiry response and information
retrieval duties on or after April 28,
2007. The applicant represents that in
the event of State Street’s resignation,
the applicant will locate another agent
who will create a similar retrieval
system, or re-establish an in-house
information retrieval system. Under
either arrangement, records will be
maintained in accordance with the
terms specified under the amendment to
PTE 99–29.
For further information regarding the
comment or other matters discussed
herein, interested persons are
encouraged to obtain copies of the
exemption application file (Exemption
Application No. D–11246). The
complete application file and all
supplemental submissions received by
the Department, are available for public
inspection in the Public Disclosure
Room of the Employee Benefits Security
Administration, Room N–1513, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.
Accordingly, after giving full
consideration to the entire record,
including the written comment
received, the Department has decided to
adopt the amendment to PTE 99–29.
General Information
The attention of interested persons is
directed to the following:
(1) The fact that a transaction is the
subject of an exemption granted under
section 408(a) of the Act and/or
4975(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (the Code) does not relieve a
fiduciary or other party in interest with
respect to a plan to which the
exemption is applicable from certain
other provisions of the Act and/or the
Code. These provisions include any
prohibited transaction provisions to
which the exemption does not apply
and the general fiduciary provisions of
section 404 of the Act which, among
other things, requires a fiduciary to
discharge his or her duties respecting
the plan solely in the interests of the
participants and beneficiaries of the
plan and in a prudent fashion in
accordance with section 404(a)(1)(B) of
the Act; nor does it affect the
requirement of section 401(a) of the
Code that the plan must operate for the
exclusive benefit of the employees of
the employer maintaining the plan and
their beneficiaries.
(2) The exemption is supplemental to,
and not in derogation of, any other
provisions of the Act and/or Code,
including statutory or administrative
exemptions and transitional rules.
Furthermore, the fact that a transaction
is subject to an administrative or
E:\FR\FM\09NON1.SGM
pfrm13
PsN: 09NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 9, 2005 / Notices
statutory exemption is not dispositive of
whether the transaction is in fact a
prohibited transaction;
(3) The availability of this exemption
is subject to the express condition that
the material facts and representations
contained in the application are true
and complete and accurately describe
all material terms of the transaction
which is the subject of this exemption.
In the case of continuing transactions, if
any of the material facts or
representations described in the
application change, the exemption will
cease to apply as of the date of such
change. In the event of any such change,
an application for a new exemption
must be made to the Department; and
(4) Under section 408(a) of ERISA, the
Department finds that the exemption is
administratively feasible, in the
interests of the plan and of its
participants and beneficiaries and
protective of the rights of participants
and beneficiaries of such plan.
Exemption
Accordingly, PTE 99–29 is amended
under the authority of section 408(a) of
the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the
Code, and in accordance with the
procedures set forth in 29 CFR part
2570, subpart B (55 32836, August 10,
1990), as set forth below:
Section I is amended to read as
follows: ‘‘Bankers Trust Company (now
known as DBTCA) shall not be
precluded from functioning as
‘‘qualified professional asset manager’’
pursuant to Prohibited Transaction
Exemption 84–14 (49 FR 9494, March
13, 1994) (PTE 94–14) for the period
beginning on the date of sentencing
with respect to the charges to which
Bankers Trust Company pled guilty on
March 11, 1999 and ending July 27,
2009, solely because of a failure to
satisfy section I(g) of PTE 84–14 as a
result of the conviction of Bankers Trust
Company for felonies described in the
March 11, 1999 felony information (the
Information) entered in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New
York, provided that:’’
Section I(c) is amended to read as
follows: ‘‘The custody operations that
were part of Bankers Trust Company at
the time of the March 11, 1999
information, and which have
subsequently been reorganized as part of
Global Institutional Services (GIS), are
subject to an annual examination of its
abandoned property and escheatment
policies, procedures and practices by an
independent public accounting firm. the
examination required by this condition
shall determine whether the written
procedures adopted by Bankers Trust
Company are properly designed to
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:18 Nov 08, 2005
Jkt 208001
assure compliance with the
requirements of ERISA. The annual
examination shall specifically require a
determination by the auditor as to
whether the Bank has developed and
adopted internal policies and
procedures that achieve appropriate
control objectives and shall include a
test of a representative sample of
transactions, fifty percent of which must
involve ERISA covered plans, to
determine operational compliance with
such policies and procedures. The
auditor shall issue a written report
describing the steps performed by the
auditor during the course of its
examination. The report shall include
the auditor’s specific findings and
recommendations. This requirement
shall continue to be applicable to the
dustody operations that were part of
Bankers Trust Company as of March 11,
1999, notwithstanding any subsequent
reorganization of the custody operation
function during the term of the
exemption. Such audit requirements
shall be applicable for any year or part
thereof in which DBTCA held ERISA
covered plan assets in custody.’’
Section III(a) is amended to read as
follows: ‘‘For purposes of this
exemption, the term ‘Bankers Trust
Company’ includes Bankers Trust
Company, and any entity that was
affiliated with Bankers Trust Company
prior to the date of the acquisition of
Bankers Trust Corporation by Duetsche
Bank AG, other than BT Alex. Brown
Incorporated and its subsidiaries. This
term also refers to Deutsche Bank Trust
Company Americas (DBTCA).’’
For a more complete statement of
facts and representations supporting the
Department’s decision to grant PTE 99–
29, refer to the proposed exemption (64
FR 30360, July 7, 1999), and the grant
notice (64 FR 30360, June 7, 1999), and
the grant notice (64 FR 40623, July 27,
1999). For a more complete statement of
fact and representations supporting the
Department’s decision to amend PTE
99–29, refer to the notice of proposed
amendment to PTE 99–29 (70 FR 5699,
February 3, 2005).
Signed at Washington, DC, this 31st day of
October, 2005.
Ivan L. Strasfeld,
Director, Office of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security Administration,
Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 05–21962 Filed 11–8–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4520–29–M
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
68093
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–57,143]
ACCPAC International, Inc., Customer
Support, Santa Rosa, CA; Notice of
Negative Determination on
Reconsideration
By letter of August 19, 2005, a
petitioner requested administrative
reconsideration of the Department of
Labor’s Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Eligibility to
Apply for Worker Adjustment
Assistance, applicable to workers of
ACCPAC International, Inc., Customer
Support, Santa Rosa, California. The
denial notice was signed on June 24,
2005, and published in the Federal
Register on July 20, 2005 (70 FR 41793).
The investigation revealed that the
petitioning workers of this firm or
subdivision do not produce an article
within the meaning of Section 222 of
the Act.
The petitioner contends that the
Department erred in its interpretation of
work performed at the subject facility as
a service and further conveys that the
workers of the subject firm supported
the production of the software during
the pre-production phases. The
petitioner further conveys that the
software was recorded on CD media or
floppy diskettes for further distribution
to customers.
A company official was contacted for
clarification in regard to the nature of
the work performed at the subject
facility. The official stated the workers
of the subject firm provided
development, marketing, sales,
professional services, administrative,
training and technical support of the
ACCPAC software. The technical
support representatives of the subject
firm provided post-sale technical
assistance, troubleshooting and training
via telephone to ACCPAC customers
and business partners. In addition, the
workers of the subject firm provided
some support to software development
prior to its release on gold CDs.
However, the physical gold CDs are not
sold to customers, but rather represent
a master copy of the software, which in
its turn is sent for mass-production to an
independent non-affiliated party vendor
for further duplication on CD–ROMs,
floppy diskettes or paper. The official
supported the information previously
provided by the subject firm that
software created at the subject facility is
not mass-produced on any media device
by the subject firm for further
duplication and distribution to
E:\FR\FM\09NON1.SGM
pfrm13
PsN: 09NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 9, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68092-68093]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21962]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security Administration
[Exemption Application No. D-11246]
Adoption of Amendment to Prohibited Transaction Exemption (PTE)
99-29 Involving Bankers Trust Company, Deutsche Bank Trust Company
Americas (DBTCA), and Deutsche Bank, AG
SUMMARY: This document contains an amendment to PTE 99-29 (64 FR 40623,
July 27, 1999), an exemption granted to Bankers Trust Company. PTE 99-
29 permits DBTCA (formerly known as Banker's Trust Company) to continue
to function as a qualified professional asset manager (QPAM) under PTE
84-14 (49 FR 9494, March 13, 1994). The amendment affects participants
and beneficiaries and fiduciaries of employee benefit plans to which
DBTCA served as custodian.
Effective Date: The amendment is effective as of January 31, 2003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allison Padams Lavigne, Office of
Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits Security Administration, US
Department of Labor, Washington, DC 20210 at (202) 693-8540. This is
not a toll-free number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 3, 2005, the Department
published a notice of proposed exemption that would amend PTE 99-29.
The amendment was requested in an application filed on behalf of DBTCA.
DBTCA is a New York banking, fiduciary, record keeping custodial,
brokerage and investment services to corporations, institutions,
governments, employee benefit plans, governmental retirement plans, and
private investors worldwide, Deutsche Bank, AG indirectly wholly owns
DBTCA.
The proposed amendment invited interested persons to submit
comments to the Department on or before March 21, 2005. On February 17,
2005, the applicant notified the Department that the names and
addresses of certain individuals who may be entitled to receive notice
of the proposed amendment were contained in records that were destroyed
by the events that occurred on September 11, 2001. As a result, the
applicant did not notify interested persons within the three-day period
specified in the proposed amendment. The applicant requested that the
comment period be extended to ensure that interested persons would have
a sufficient amount of time in which to provide their comments to the
Department. In addition, the applicant stated that it had the names and
addresses of custody clients of DBTCA as of December 31, 2002. The
applicant believed that this list of clients would reasonably include
all parties that would have an interest in the proposed amendment. The
Department concurred with the applicant. Accordingly, on March 29,
2005, the applicant sent notice to all custody clients of DBTCA as of
December 31, 2002. This notice informed interested persons of their
right to comment on the proposed amendment, and informed these persons
that comments were due to the Department on or before May 27, 2005.
Written Comments
The Department received one written comment. No requests for a
public hearing were received. The comment was submitted by the
applicant who wished to clarify that check ledgers, cancelled checks
and class action records that are described in the notice of proposed
amendment continue to be the property of the applicant, but such
materials can only be effectively searched using State Street's record
keeping systems. In this regard, State Street currently serves as
inquiry response and information agent for the applicant, and maintains
information on its systems. The applicant relies upon State Street to
answer inquiries related to these records. Under the terms of the
applicant's arrangement with State Street, State Street may resign from
its inquiry response and information retrieval duties on or after April
28, 2007. The applicant represents that in the event of State Street's
resignation, the applicant will locate another agent who will create a
similar retrieval system, or re-establish an in-house information
retrieval system. Under either arrangement, records will be maintained
in accordance with the terms specified under the amendment to PTE 99-
29.
For further information regarding the comment or other matters
discussed herein, interested persons are encouraged to obtain copies of
the exemption application file (Exemption Application No. D-11246). The
complete application file and all supplemental submissions received by
the Department, are available for public inspection in the Public
Disclosure Room of the Employee Benefits Security Administration, Room
N-1513, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210.
Accordingly, after giving full consideration to the entire record,
including the written comment received, the Department has decided to
adopt the amendment to PTE 99-29.
General Information
The attention of interested persons is directed to the following:
(1) The fact that a transaction is the subject of an exemption
granted under section 408(a) of the Act and/or 4975(c)(2) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code) does not relieve a fiduciary
or other party in interest with respect to a plan to which the
exemption is applicable from certain other provisions of the Act and/or
the Code. These provisions include any prohibited transaction
provisions to which the exemption does not apply and the general
fiduciary provisions of section 404 of the Act which, among other
things, requires a fiduciary to discharge his or her duties respecting
the plan solely in the interests of the participants and beneficiaries
of the plan and in a prudent fashion in accordance with section
404(a)(1)(B) of the Act; nor does it affect the requirement of section
401(a) of the Code that the plan must operate for the exclusive benefit
of the employees of the employer maintaining the plan and their
beneficiaries.
(2) The exemption is supplemental to, and not in derogation of, any
other provisions of the Act and/or Code, including statutory or
administrative exemptions and transitional rules. Furthermore, the fact
that a transaction is subject to an administrative or
[[Page 68093]]
statutory exemption is not dispositive of whether the transaction is in
fact a prohibited transaction;
(3) The availability of this exemption is subject to the express
condition that the material facts and representations contained in the
application are true and complete and accurately describe all material
terms of the transaction which is the subject of this exemption. In the
case of continuing transactions, if any of the material facts or
representations described in the application change, the exemption will
cease to apply as of the date of such change. In the event of any such
change, an application for a new exemption must be made to the
Department; and
(4) Under section 408(a) of ERISA, the Department finds that the
exemption is administratively feasible, in the interests of the plan
and of its participants and beneficiaries and protective of the rights
of participants and beneficiaries of such plan.
Exemption
Accordingly, PTE 99-29 is amended under the authority of section
408(a) of the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, and in accordance
with the procedures set forth in 29 CFR part 2570, subpart B (55 32836,
August 10, 1990), as set forth below:
Section I is amended to read as follows: ``Bankers Trust Company
(now known as DBTCA) shall not be precluded from functioning as
``qualified professional asset manager'' pursuant to Prohibited
Transaction Exemption 84-14 (49 FR 9494, March 13, 1994) (PTE 94-14)
for the period beginning on the date of sentencing with respect to the
charges to which Bankers Trust Company pled guilty on March 11, 1999
and ending July 27, 2009, solely because of a failure to satisfy
section I(g) of PTE 84-14 as a result of the conviction of Bankers
Trust Company for felonies described in the March 11, 1999 felony
information (the Information) entered in the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New York, provided that:''
Section I(c) is amended to read as follows: ``The custody
operations that were part of Bankers Trust Company at the time of the
March 11, 1999 information, and which have subsequently been
reorganized as part of Global Institutional Services (GIS), are subject
to an annual examination of its abandoned property and escheatment
policies, procedures and practices by an independent public accounting
firm. the examination required by this condition shall determine
whether the written procedures adopted by Bankers Trust Company are
properly designed to assure compliance with the requirements of ERISA.
The annual examination shall specifically require a determination by
the auditor as to whether the Bank has developed and adopted internal
policies and procedures that achieve appropriate control objectives and
shall include a test of a representative sample of transactions, fifty
percent of which must involve ERISA covered plans, to determine
operational compliance with such policies and procedures. The auditor
shall issue a written report describing the steps performed by the
auditor during the course of its examination. The report shall include
the auditor's specific findings and recommendations. This requirement
shall continue to be applicable to the dustody operations that were
part of Bankers Trust Company as of March 11, 1999, notwithstanding any
subsequent reorganization of the custody operation function during the
term of the exemption. Such audit requirements shall be applicable for
any year or part thereof in which DBTCA held ERISA covered plan assets
in custody.''
Section III(a) is amended to read as follows: ``For purposes of
this exemption, the term `Bankers Trust Company' includes Bankers Trust
Company, and any entity that was affiliated with Bankers Trust Company
prior to the date of the acquisition of Bankers Trust Corporation by
Duetsche Bank AG, other than BT Alex. Brown Incorporated and its
subsidiaries. This term also refers to Deutsche Bank Trust Company
Americas (DBTCA).''
For a more complete statement of facts and representations
supporting the Department's decision to grant PTE 99-29, refer to the
proposed exemption (64 FR 30360, July 7, 1999), and the grant notice
(64 FR 30360, June 7, 1999), and the grant notice (64 FR 40623, July
27, 1999). For a more complete statement of fact and representations
supporting the Department's decision to amend PTE 99-29, refer to the
notice of proposed amendment to PTE 99-29 (70 FR 5699, February 3,
2005).
Signed at Washington, DC, this 31st day of October, 2005.
Ivan L. Strasfeld,
Director, Office of Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits
Security Administration, Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 05-21962 Filed 11-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4520-29-M